Do You Believe in an Anthropogenic Greenhouse Effect?

One_Liner · August 31, 2016, 11:39am

One set of false beliefs is that technology and science can solve our problems.

James_S_Saint · August 31, 2016, 11:53am

Oh that’s not a belief. That is a government mandate and obsession with power.

One_Liner · August 31, 2016, 7:56pm

People then believe this mandate and obsession with power.

Arminius · August 31, 2016, 11:19pm

Not all people.

One_Liner · September 1, 2016, 9:30am

A vocal minority is far more powerful than the silent majority.

Arminius · September 1, 2016, 1:39pm

Yes. But there is an unadapted minority within the silent majority, and sometimes this unadapted people are even the majority. It depends on how the times are, how the respective situation is.

With regard to the belief in an anthropogenic greenhouse effect, there is a vocal minority and a silent minority behind the vocal minority, and this two want the majority to believe in an anthropogenic greenhouse effect as if it should become a part of their new religion - other parts of tis new religion are: globalism (although it mainly contradicts the anthropogenic greenhouse effect) feminism, system of guilt complex (guilty conscience, thus: guiltism [does that word exist already?]), … and so on. The question is whether it is already a majority or still a minority that believes in an anthropogenic greenhouse effect. The number of that believers still increases.

MagsJ · September 2, 2016, 9:17pm

Isn’t the jury still out on this? Our records are too new to know whether environment had a bearing on the ozone or not.

What does the op suggest we do in light of that?

Arminius · September 3, 2016, 12:31am

The opening post of this thread merely suggests a question and the re-voting option.

One_Liner · September 3, 2016, 12:37am

Arminius:

One Liner:

Arminius:

Not all people.

A vocal minority is far more powerful than the silent majority.

Yes. But there is an unadapted minority within the silent majority, and sometimes this unadapted people are even the majority. It depends on how the times are, how the respective situation is.

With regard to the belief in an anthropogenic greenhouse effect, there is a vocal minority and a silent minority behind the vocal minority, and this two want the majority to believe in an anthropogenic greenhouse effect as if it should become a part of their new religion - other parts of tis new religion are: globalism (although it mainly contradicts the anthropogenic greenhouse effect) feminism, system of guilt complex (guilty conscience, thus: guiltism [does that word exist already?]), … and so on. The question is whether it is already a majority or still a minority that believes in an anthropogenic greenhouse effect. The number of that believers still increases.

I think the entire topic (for or against) is a non-issue for a majority of the worlds population.

Arminius · September 3, 2016, 12:59am

One Liner:

Arminius:

One Liner:

A vocal minority is far more powerful than the silent majority.

Yes. But there is an unadapted minority within the silent majority, and sometimes this unadapted people are even the majority. It depends on how the times are, how the respective situation is.

With regard to the belief in an anthropogenic greenhouse effect, there is a vocal minority and a silent minority behind the vocal minority, and this two want the majority to believe in an anthropogenic greenhouse effect as if it should become a part of their new religion - other parts of tis new religion are: globalism (although it mainly contradicts the anthropogenic greenhouse effect) feminism, system of guilt complex (guilty conscience, thus: guiltism [does that word exist already?]), … and so on. The question is whether it is already a majority or still a minority that believes in an anthropogenic greenhouse effect. The number of that believers still increases.

I think the entire topic (for or against) is a non-issue for a majority of the worlds population.

That can be true. I do not know, because the public polls and statistics about the topic and the non-issue for a majority are also full of fakes and rhetorics - as usual.

One_Liner · September 3, 2016, 1:29am

I would imagine that these sort of public polls may only statisically apply to about 1 billion people (US and Europe) and not the other 6 billion people (rest of the world).

Arminius · September 3, 2016, 6:06pm

Maybe. That would mean about 20% of 7 biliion people. The currebt number of the world population is 7,447,916,555. So we currently have 1,495,833,110 humans as the 20% of the current world population. I think this is probably a realistic number of those you mean. And 20% are enough for those who are managing “it”.

Population in the world is currently (2016) growing at a rate of around 1.13% per year. The current average population change is estimated at around 80 million per year.

Annual growth rate reached its peak in the late 1960s, when it was at 2% and above. The rate of increase has therefore almost halved since its peak of 2.19 percent, which was reached in 1963.

The annual growth rate is currently declining and is projected to continue to decline in the coming years. Currently, it is estimated that it will become less than 1% by 2020 and less than 0.5% by 2050.

This means that world population will continue to grow in the 21st century, but at a slower rate compared to the recent past. World population has doubled (100% increase) in 40 years from 1959 (3 billion) to 1999 (6 billion). It is now estimated that it will take a further 39 years to increase by another 50%, to become 9 billion by 2038.

…

Population density map of the world …:

…

World Population by Religion.

According to a recent study (based on the 2010 world population of 6.9 billion) by The Pew Forum, there are:
2,173,180,000 Christians (31% of world population), of which 50% are Catholic, 37% Protestant, 12% Orthodox, and 1% other.

1,598,510,000 Muslims (23%), of which 87-90% are Sunnis, 10-13% Shia.

1,126,500,000 No Religion affiliation (16%): atheists, agnostics and people who do not identify with any particular religion. One-in-five people (20%) in the United States are religiously unaffiliated.

1,033,080,000 Hindus (15%), the overwhelming majority (94%) of which live in India.
  487,540,000 Buddhists (7%), of which half live in China.
  405,120,000 Folk Religionists (6%): faiths that are closely associated with a particular group of people, ethnicity or tribe.
    58,110,000 Other Religions (1%): Baha’i faith, Taoism, Jainism, Shintoism, Sikhism, Tenrikyo, Wicca, Zoroastrianism and many others.
    13,850,000 Jews (0.2%), four-fifths of which live in two countries: United States (41%) and Israel (41%).
…

How many people have ever lived on earth?

It was written during the 1970s that 75% of the people who had ever been born were alive at that moment. This was grossly false.

Assuming that we start counting from about 50,000 B.C., the time when modern Homo sapiens appeared on the earth (and not from 700,000 B.C. when the ancestors of Homo sapiens appeared, or several million years ago when hominids were present), taking into account that all population data are a rough estimate, and assuming a constant growth rate applied to each period up to modern times, it has been estimated that a total of approximately 106 billion people have been born since the dawn of the human species, making the population currently alive roughly 6% of all people who have ever lived on planet Earth.

Others have estimated the number of human beings who have ever lived to be anywhere from 45 billion to 125 billion, with most estimates falling into the range of 90 to 110 billion humans.

World Population clock: sources and methodology.

The world population counter displayed on Worldometers takes into consideration data from two major sources: the United Nations and the U.S. Census Bureau.
The United Nations Population Division of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs every two years calculates, updates, and publishes estimates of total population in its World Population Prospects series. These population estimates and projections provide the standard and consistent set of population figures that are used throughout the United Nations system.

The World Population Prospect: the 2015 Revision provides the most recent data available (released on July 29, 2015). Estimates and projected world population and country specific populations are given from 1950 through 2100 and are released every two years. The latest revision has revised upwards the world population projections. Worldometers, as it is common practice, utilizes the medium fertility estimates.

Data underlying the population estimates are national and sub national census data and data on births, deaths, and migrants available from national sources and publications, as well as from questionnaires. For all countries, census and registration data are evaluated and, if necessary, adjusted for incompleteness by the Population Division as part of its preparations of the official United Nations population estimates and projections.

The International Programs Center at the U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division also develops estimates and projections based on analysis of available data (based on census, survey, and administrative information) on population, fertility, mortality, and migration for each country or area of the world. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, world population reached 7 billion on March 12, 2012.

For most countries adjustment of the data is necessary to correct for errors, omissions, and inconsistencies in the data. Finally, since most recent data for a single country is often at least two years old, the current world population figure is necessarily a projection of past data based on assumed trends. As new data become available, assumptions and data are reevaluated and past conclusions and current figures may be modified.

For information about how these estimates and projections are made by the U.S. Census Bureau, see the Population Estimates and Projections Methodology. 
Why Worldometers clocks are the most accurate.

The above world population clock is based on the latest estimates released on July 29, 2015 by the United Nations and will show the same number wherever you are in the world and whatever time you set on your PC. Worldometers is the only website to show live counters that are based on U.N. data and that do not follow the user’s PC clock.

Visitors around the world visiting a PC clock based counter, see different numbers depending on where they are located, and in the past have seen other world population clocks - such as the one hosted on a United Nations website and on National Geographic - reaching 7 billion whenever their locally set PC clocks reached 4:21:10 AM on October 31, 2011.

Obviously, the UN data is based on estimates and can’t be 100% accurate, so in all honesty nobody can possibly say with any degree of certainty on which day world population reached 7 billion (or any other exact number), let alone at what time. But once an estimate is made (based on the best data and analysis available), the world population clock should be showing the same number at any given time anywhere around the world.

Source: worldometers.info/world-population/ .

One_Liner · September 3, 2016, 6:51pm

As I said, it’s a non-issue for a majority of the worlds population.

Arminius · September 3, 2016, 7:05pm

As I said: Maybe.The humans of the Occidental culture and merely some others are probabaly the only humans (probably in fact about 20%) who are interested in the anthropogenic greenhouse effect.

One_Liner · September 3, 2016, 7:22pm

But just because it’s a non-issue for a majority of the worlds population doesn’t mean it’s an unimportant issue.

Arminius · September 3, 2016, 7:24pm

Yes. It does not mean that, but it does not have to mean that either.

Mictlantecuhtli · September 4, 2016, 7:44am

Anybody that denies the human impact on the natural environment is a fucking idiot or corporate and government tool.

Arminius · September 4, 2016, 11:02pm

Humans are the only species that really fights against the nature. But when it comes to accusing humans to be responsible for the greenhouse effect, we must also say that there is much money in play. The greenhouse effect is not automatically anthropogenic, because it is a natural effect by definition and caused by the sun and some other cosmic effects. So the question ist whether humans are really capable of causing a greenhouse effect. It is no question that humans are ecological destroyers, that they destroy their natural environment, but it remains a question whether the greenhouse effect is caused by them, in other words: whether the anthropogenic greenhouse effect is a criminal fact or a criminal fake (caused by some certain humans who make much money out of it) or both.

Note: The money that is payed as a fine (=> penance) by the polluters (=> sinners) goes to the "eco-popes“, the banksters.

One_Liner · September 5, 2016, 10:04am

Humans on both sides desire to make money and will maintain their lies and deny their truths in order to make money, and it is ludicrous to suggest that only one particular side has this motivation.

Arminius · September 5, 2016, 7:01pm

It is not ludicrous, because all others than those relatively few of the one particular side do not have the possibility to do it to the same extent.

In addition: Not all “humans on both sides desire to make money and will maintain their lies and deny their truths in order to make money”.